Commissioners consider creating a 'rural large-lot' zoning option to preserve rural character while allowing development

The commission discussed whether to amend the agricultural zoning rules or create a new "rural large-lot" district with a roughly 2-acre minimum lot size that would permit lower-density residential subdivisions while retaining rural character and different development standards (narrower streets, open-ditch drainage, reduced stormwater detention requirements).

Staff framed the change as a way to provide alternatives for large-parcel owners who want to subdivide without producing higher-density subdivisions; staff noted the existing agricultural district currently requires a minimum 5-acre lot and that many agricultural parcels are grandfathered and smaller than that minimum.

Attorney John Neal, representing Greg and Beverly Waverly, objected to altering agricultural zoning and warned the change could make farming more difficult and force sales due to tax and zoning shifts. "We shouldn't be making it impossible for people to farm," Neal said, urging caution and suggesting the town await the outcome of related litigation before pursuing major changes.

Commissioners discussed two approaches: amend the agricultural district language or create a separate large-lot residential district. Staff suggested creating a separate "rural large-lot" district might avoid giving landowners the sense that agricultural zoning has been eliminated and would allow tailored development standards for 2-acre minimum lots. The commission directed staff to prepare drafts that could include narrower street standards, open-ditch drainage, and revised stormwater policies appropriate for large lots.

No final decision was made; staff will draft district language and development standards and return with options.